jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (6 posts)

Isn't violence sometimes necessary?

  1. Ali Sulehria profile image72
    Ali Sulehriaposted 2 years ago

    Isn't violence sometimes necessary?

    Isn't violence sometimes necessary, for example in self-defense or to defend those who cannot defend themselves?

  2. profile image0
    Stargrrlposted 2 years ago

    Violence is only necessary if it is self-defense.  I agree with you there.

    1. savvydating profile image95
      savvydatingposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      There are some who define self-defense way too broadly, so it depends. However, if someone is coming at your child with a knife, and certain death is highly probable, you can't just stand there. You have to act with violence.

  3. healthyfitness profile image78
    healthyfitnessposted 2 years ago

    In self defense, yes. In any other situations, most likely not. The way we progress as humans is to avoid our dangerous natural instincts (not all of them). Do unto others, as you would want done upon you. That's what I live by.

  4. connorj profile image77
    connorjposted 2 years ago


    Absolutely; although, I agree it should be in self-defence this (self-defence) can be significantly ambiguous at times. Imagine if during WWII the Allies continued to allow the Nazis to advance (Chamberlain-like) further before battling with them and destroying their leadership and many others...
    Now, rather timely, although one could argue that Sissi (backwards) is not threatening us directly, it would be a significant mistake not to crush them now before they are airborn and have increased in their significantly diabolical influence...
    I always reflect back to a game of chess or if you will, ice hockey; sometimes, the best defence can indeed be a timely offense...

  5. Luke M Simmons profile image77
    Luke M Simmonsposted 2 years ago

    The typical devil's advocate question is as follows: if you could prevent the death of numerous innocent people, even if it meant the death of a single guilty person, would you?  I personally would, and have a hard time reconciling a moral opposition.